America doesn't have enough guns

[Trausti]

Extreme consequence for egregiously illegal possession

We have the means for that already. But law enforcement and prosecution are now viewed as icky and bad. No bail. Restorative justice. Abolish prisons.

While we have the theoretical means for that, we don't have the actual means for it. Why? For one reason, conservatives in Congress (which are mostly GOP) prevent even the simplest measures like having cross-referencing for gun ownership files.

In what world would criminals give a shit if Congress passed more regulations on lawful gun owners?

In the world that made it harder or more expensive for them to get guns. It would also make it more difficult for the mentally ill to get firearms. Come on, even you can figure that one out.

Brazil had some of the strictest gun laws in world. Result?

 

[Jarhyn]

Extreme consequence for egregiously illegal possession

We have the means for that already. But law enforcement and prosecution are now viewed as icky and bad. No bail. Restorative justice. Abolish prisons.

While we have the theoretical means for that, we don't have the actual means for it. Why? For one reason, conservatives in Congress (which are mostly GOP) prevent even the simplest measures like having cross-referencing for gun ownership files.

In what world would criminals give a shit if Congress passed more regulations on lawful gun owners?

In the world that made it harder or more expensive for them to get guns. It would also make it more difficult for the mentally ill to get firearms. Come on, even you can figure that one out.

Brazil had some of the strictest gun laws [and most corrupt governments and police forces] in world. Result?

Back to you: answer your own question Trausti!

 

[bleubird]

Wisconsin Republicans pass bill allowing some high school students to bring a gun to campus

The GOP-backed bill comes amid a national upsurge in gun violence

www.salon.com

What could possible go wrong?

 

[Gun Nut]

Extreme consequence for egregiously illegal possession

We have the means for that already. But law enforcement and prosecution are now viewed as icky and bad. No bail. Restorative justice. Abolish prisons.

While we have the theoretical means for that, we don't have the actual means for it. Why? For one reason, conservatives in Congress (which are mostly GOP) prevent even the simplest measures like having cross-referencing for gun ownership files.

In what world would criminals give a shit if Congress passed more regulations on lawful gun owners?

.. when the "more regulations" are somewhere in the vicinity of death penalty for the things that ONLY unlawful gun owners do (as opposed to things an otherwise lawful gun owner may accidently do)... Gang violence is a huge chunk of the problem - that sort of distribution of illegal guns and repeat offenses, etc..

 

[Elixir]

Wisconsin Republicans pass bill allowing some high school students to bring a gun to campus

The GOP-backed bill comes amid a national upsurge in gun violence

www.salon.com

What could possible go wrong?

Oh, prob’ly nothing. But if anything can go wrong, the GQP will make sure it does. They need things to scare the sheep with.

 

[laughing dog]

Extreme consequence for egregiously illegal possession

We have the means for that already. But law enforcement and prosecution are now viewed as icky and bad. No bail. Restorative justice. Abolish prisons.

While we have the theoretical means for that, we don't have the actual means for it. Why? For one reason, conservatives in Congress (which are mostly GOP) prevent even the simplest measures like having cross-referencing for gun ownership files.

In what world would criminals give a shit if Congress passed more regulations on lawful gun owners?

In the world that made it harder or more expensive for them to get guns. It would also make it more difficult for the mentally ill to get firearms. Come on, even you can figure that one out.

Brazil had some of the strictest gun laws in world. Result?

In order to have an actual point, you'd have to
1) substantiate your claim,
2) show that the laws were enforced,
3) have some indication of the outcomes without those laws.

Without the above, you have nothing. Moreover, as bilby pointed out earlier, your position is logically inconsistent. In other threads, you bemoan the lack of prosecution of criminals and the increase in crime. Yet here you are implying that gun laws will have no effect on crime.

To make this simple, either enforced laws reduce crime or they don't. Which one is it? If it is the former, you need to revisit your love affair with unlimited gun ownership.

For example, if the gun laws had been strict and enforced enough, do you think this erstwhile law-abiding citizen and stalwart Republican (up to the point where his road rage did him in) John Kuczwanski, might still be alive today?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Societal breakdown has nothing to do with it. Nor that 1/3 of the stories are from the Chicago area.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

For example, if the gun laws had been strict and enforced enough, do you think this erstwhile law-abiding citizen and stalwart Republican (up to the point where his road rage did him in) John Kuczwanski, might still be alive today?

This is a clear case of where better gun laws would help. His prior road rage case should have denied him guns.

Note, however, a problem that has cropped up locally--I forget what the offense was but it was changed to result in a denial of guns. That had the unintended consequence that prosecutors were undercharging rather than deal with the required court time it caused. They simply didn't have the resources to prosecute the charges they should have brought.

 

[Swammerdami]

Wisconsin Republicans pass bill allowing some high school students to bring a gun to campus

The GOP-backed bill comes amid a national upsurge in gun violence

www.salon.com

What could possible go wrong?

Perhaps the pressing problem of not super-sizing the ketchup doses is not confined to fast food drive-thrus.

Wisconsin school cafeteria workers are apt to be less stingy with the condiments after this.

Brazil had some of the strictest gun laws [and most corrupt governments and police forces] in world. Result?

Back to you: answer your own question Trausti!

I like to play charades. Sounds like? Break it up into syllables? Is it bigger than a breadbox?


In another matter, bilby wasn't sure that Yemen was a utopia despite being in the #2 slot for civilian gun possession. But Yemen has only 0.5 civilian guns per capita compared to U.S.A.'s 1.2. Perhaps Yemen, like America, needs MORE guns.

 

[Elixir]

Perhaps Yemen, like America, needs MORE guns.

Well, duh!
Has there EVER been a problem that could not be addressed with MORE GUNS?

Note to self: stop by the friendly local shop and pick up a Glock19, a couple of ARs and enough ammo to get them sighted in and still have plenty for ... well, ya never know, right? But whatever it is, my air rifle/pellet gun is almost certainly not gonna be enough.

 

[atrib]

The obvious solution is to allow, nay, to encourage, widespread private ownership of thermonuclear weapons.

The whole problem would solve itself in a week. Hell, maybe only a few hours.

The costs to license a privately owned thermonuclear device are exorbitant. Heck, the costs to license a 50-cal belt-fed machine gun are exorbitant too, although many jurisdictions will allow you to own and operate one if you are not a felon and willing to pay for the permit.

 

[Gospel]

Wisconsin Republicans pass bill allowing some high school students to bring a gun to campus

The GOP-backed bill comes amid a national upsurge in gun violence

www.salon.com

What could possible go wrong?

Call me when they've reached the final stage.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

German police say university attacker got weapons in Austria

The 18-year-old gunman who opened fire Monday during a packed lecture at Heidelberg University in southwestern German bought three weapons about a week ago in Austria, German police said Wednesday. The gunman killed one person and wounded three others before killing himself. Two of these weapons were seized at the scene, along with around 150 rounds of ammunition. The third weapon, a rifle, was found by Austrian police in a room that the man, who was not identified by name in line with German privacy rules, had rented during his stay in Austria, Heidelberg police said in a statement. Police say the German man (who was a biology student at the university) purchased the two weapons used in the attack from a weapons dealer and the third from a private individual, both in Austria.

 

[bilby]

German police say university attacker got weapons in Austria

The 18-year-old gunman who opened fire Monday during a packed lecture at Heidelberg University in southwestern German bought three weapons about a week ago in Austria, German police said Wednesday. The gunman killed one person and wounded three others before killing himself. Two of these weapons were seized at the scene, along with around 150 rounds of ammunition. The third weapon, a rifle, was found by Austrian police in a room that the man, who was not identified by name in line with German privacy rules, had rented during his stay in Austria, Heidelberg police said in a statement. Police say the German man (who was a biology student at the university) purchased the two weapons used in the attack from a weapons dealer and the third from a private individual, both in Austria.

Firearms are not at all difficult to obtain in Europe.

They're uncommonly used because they're rendered undesirable by the laws and regulations, not because the laws and regulations make them hard to obtain.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The obvious solution is to allow, nay, to encourage, widespread private ownership of thermonuclear weapons.

The whole problem would solve itself in a week. Hell, maybe only a few hours.

The costs to license a privately owned thermonuclear device are exorbitant. Heck, the costs to license a 50-cal belt-fed machine gun are exorbitant too, although many jurisdictions will allow you to own and operate one if you are not a felon and willing to pay for the permit.

Actually, the cost to license is $200 plus a background check that I'm sure the person pays for. Same as any other NFA item.

Nukes wouldn't be considered firearms in the first place, they're explosives. Explosives have their own licensing system.

(And there actually isn't a reason against privately owned nukes. Private possession would be impossible because the same rules should apply in civilian hands that apply in military hands--among other things, the two man rule. Ownership, though--if SpaceX decides it wants to use nukes to move an asteroid I see no reason to prohibit it. The military sends people along to place the bombs where the engineers say to.)

 

[Tigers!]

Seems to me that obvious answer is that fast food restaurants need a machine gun turret on the roof or drive thru window.

If they are looking for some gear try this
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rel...lection-of-militaria-uncovered-301468199.html

 

[Jarhyn]

...
(And there actually isn't a reason against privately owned nukes...)

There absolutely is a difference between a selfish entity begging and paying for access to one or two nuclear cores for a tightly controlled mission of controlled detonation with strong anti-malignancy measures, and a selfish entity having the unilateral right to make, control, and deploy unilaterally a nuclear MIRV.

The original joke was on Nuclear Weapons, as I understood it.

 

[atrib]

The obvious solution is to allow, nay, to encourage, widespread private ownership of thermonuclear weapons.

The whole problem would solve itself in a week. Hell, maybe only a few hours.

The costs to license a privately owned thermonuclear device are exorbitant. Heck, the costs to license a 50-cal belt-fed machine gun are exorbitant too, although many jurisdictions will allow you to own and operate one if you are not a felon and willing to pay for the permit.

Actually, the cost to license is $200 plus a background check that I'm sure the person pays for. Same as any other NFA item.

Yes. But the cost for a dealer to get and maintain a license to sell fully automatic firearms gets passed on to the buyer, and the restriction that civilians can only own fully automatic firearms made and registered before 1986 makes the price of such weapons exorbitant.

Nukes wouldn't be considered firearms in the first place, they're explosives. Explosives have their own licensing system.

(And there actually isn't a reason against privately owned nukes. Private possession would be impossible because the same rules should apply in civilian hands that apply in military hands--among other things, the two man rule. Ownership, though--if SpaceX decides it wants to use nukes to move an asteroid I see no reason to prohibit it. The military sends people along to place the bombs where the engineers say to.)

I was not serious when I made the post, in case it wasn't obvious. I don't think civilians should be permitted to own nuclear weapons privately, or even fully automatic firearms for that matter.

 

[Swammerdami]

... the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

arms
/ärmz/
noun
plural noun: arms

1. weapons and ammunition; armaments.
"arms exports"

It seems pretty clear to me. Jehovah didn't inscribe "small fire-arms" on the Holy Tablet: He wrote "arms" and "arms" means "weapons." Foreigners and legalistic persons may have signed over their right to bear arms of mass destruction, but the Rights of the American People are inviolable. Prohibitions against machine-guns, flame-throwers, SAMs, cruise missiles, etc.are just more liberal overreach.

 

[Swammerdami]

... the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Purists will note that the comma is ungrammatical. The complete Commandment (according to most sources?) is "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Three commas, at least two of which are ungrammatical! IIRC one of the "commas" is allegedly just a smudge. Has the bad grammar of the Second Commandment ever been adjudicated by a judge?